
































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































4 




t 


t 









I 









» 






I 





7 


> 


i 



in 

I 






> . , • 

I 

» 


■ V 


■f 










■■■ Jim - ^ 

• ^ ^ 


«v..f 


';’t 


j t 


' ' j s -'>‘ • 

' T* •- ‘ i 




.1 UJ -v-,,. 





:i?r :.’v.:^ ' 

■Ajr. K -' 


A\i 


‘ s -* 


vV.\* 




i*?; S'V^Vi’. 

r * f^.V'»J.. '. ■ • .-A .• • I \ .\f' 


/•i: 






r ] 


X* 


ri 


.')'ii> ■ f■ ' 'w vTr^'-. F7'^r'- '',H-'■ ;• :■ 

W : I'- : >y; : .wVijfy . ,,. - ^ : 


^<1 


'■. > V 






■ ■ ■.•'>>■ •'si;'' / ■• 




». . 1 ' r »' 





'"y'’ '>'■. ^ 






,: ;:7j'lili), y:■ ■' 

W. ■;. ':■'ij. V.i V '■'■•'• ' ■ 


ii#'s';VVaS'i;;' 
t''i-»M .'..0.'u ':.; 

^t . ;ls*, ■• 

':- t> '• ■ 

^ ( X ‘*4i *V'' 


.,.f w... 

A.. 

J. - 


. y 



^fVv .. 

1,1 ^. • - ^. ' -•'. .■;>.*■ 

' f , • •*■■• j ^ r. • . .*' ' 


V ■ '•’.:/ .'I 


*1 ''. '<'^|V''' 


''’ * i't f ^ > * ■ " *j' '^'- ** a\S^'> 






aifc ^ ■. -i ■■ •'f ;'^|i'^;:.' 




Ji . 

¥ 

.}■ 




■^4. 





,V'Si;.'‘&y; »,.:■'■*«..... .(;'•, v,.h| 




I A v' :»!' . r'.<<,: .':,y ’'v 

' •■'v./y^.AVik-;'iryA4Sp‘^H|fW,^ 



■'L- 





REOOISrSTRITCTIOnsr. 


i 


S E E C HE 


OF 


'. C. BEAMAN, of Michigan 






IN THE 


" HOUSE OE HEPRESEHTATIVES, MAKCH.22, 1864^ 

I . 

ON THE 

i 

/o guarantee to certain States, ivhose Governments have heen usurped^- 
'or overthrown, a Repuhlican form of Government. 


W A S IIIK a T 0 K': 

H, POLKINHORN, PRINTER, 37o AND 377 D STREEf, .NEAR SEVENTH, 

1 8 6 4. 












■ ■■ ■■, ■ 



J- 


\ 




E©8. HiEt. So<^ 

* 





t‘ 


\. 




•'.A 
•!■ •• 



, i// >‘ 1 ^ 

5‘-': 

' y.' ','■ 

' -i .' 'f n' 

«<- £ -S* /! ■ W 



< 











>. ,• 



1 J.: 


>• 


• * 

« J> 

n • 


i'\ 


\ b 




s :e^ E E o h: - 


- ^ . 

Mr. Speaker : 

The principal features of the proposed legislation now under consideration, were be¬ 
fore the House nearly two years ago, in the form of a bill reported by Mr. Ashley, Chair¬ 
man of the Committee on Territories, to establish Provisional Governments for the dis¬ 
tricts of country in rebellion against the United States. That bill was laid on the table 
without discussion ; but soon thereafter, in Committee of the Whole House on the State 
of the Union, I attempted to show that its provisions were in accordance with the Con¬ 
stitution and suitable to the distracted condition of the country. 

In justification of such legislation I assumed the ground, that the so-called seceded 
States had ceased to exist under the Constitutien ; that their constitutional governments 
had been abrogated ; that if de facto governmehts had supervened—being in opposition 
to and in defiance of the Federal Constitution and in a state of actual war against the 
Union—they were illegal and void ; that to deny this and maintain their existence as 
legitimate, organized States, is an admission of the doctrine of secession; because 
having repudiated the Federal authority and formed a hostile confederacy and waged 
war against the United States ; and having no governments that can be recognized under 
the Constitution, if such States or governments have a legal existence they must be 
regarded as foreign powers. But I denied the doctrine of secession, and insisted, that 
though a State or the people and constituted authorities thereof may commit treason 
and forfeit their franchises and cease to have existence as a legal state organization, 
still they cannot lawfully cast oft’ their allegiance to the Federal authority ; and that 
when a State becomes vacated by treason, her territory and people still remaining within 
the limits of the United States, and under the jurisdiction of the Federal Constitution, 
it is the right and the imperative duty of the National authority to provide a government 
for the people and secure the restoration of domestic tranquility. That bill, though 
somewhat difl'erent in its details, was in principle similar to the one now under consid¬ 
eration. Its competency rested upon the same basis, and the remarks I oflfered in refer¬ 
ence thereto would be equally applicable in the present discussion ; but I shall not here 
repeat them. 

During the last two years we have made progress. There has been much dis¬ 
cussion touching the condition of the seceded States, and a very radical change has 
transpired as well in the public mind as in the policy of the Government. For a long 
time after the commencement of the war, there seemed to be great apprehension on the 
part of all branches of the Government, that something might be done or omitted, that 
would operate as an admission that the rebel States had in law seceded. For sometime 
we seemed to be confounded by the anomalous estate of affairs, and the confusion of 
ideas everywhere prevalent. A very respectable class of our people, in point of num¬ 
bers, denied that a rebellious State can be lawfully coerced into submission. 

Others admitting the sovereignty of the nation and demanding an enforcement of the 
supremacy of the laws, were nevertheless fearful of the adoption of unconstitutional 


> 9 



4 


means. We did not, in the earlier stages of the rebellion, seem to comprehend pre¬ 
cisely the status of the seceded districts. We saw State after State renounce allegiance 
to the Union and enter into a hostile confederacy. We saw that whatever of govern¬ 
ment remained in those States was antagonistic and inimical; still we spoke of them 
as States of the Union. We did not readily apply the familiar principle, that an illegal 
government is a void government, and that a void government is no government. It 
is not intended by this that where a State government becomes void in law by reason 
of treason, there is necessarily no body politic, no de facto organization ; but in such 
case the State has no legal existence under the Constitution, We knew, in point of 
fact, that the great mass of the rebels had taken an oath of allegiance to a hostile con¬ 
federacy, and were represented in a rebel Congress. We felt at liberty to shoot them 
down, and sent half a million of men to the field for that purpose. We knew if they 
had any laws, any constitutions they had carried them into the rebel camp ; but never¬ 
theless we continued to talk about the rights of the States, the requirements of the 
local latrs, and the inviolability of domestic institutions. We did not clearlv distinguish 
between abandonment or abrogation, and legal secession. We did not believe that a State 
can lawfully secede, and therefore we somehow got the impression, that South Carolina, 
though waging war against the Union, was a legal subsisting State organization, under 
the Constitution of the United States and entitled to recognition.and respect. Hence 
we did hot immediately discover that the destruction of local government had prepared 
the way for the substitution of Federal authority. Acting under such delusions our 
generals in the field published orders and proclamations preventing as well the release 
as the escape of slaves. Colored men were property by the laws of Virginia, and there¬ 
fore you must not let them shoot their masters. In some instances avowed rebels pro¬ 
ceeded to our camps and demanded and rectiived the surrender of slaves, claiming them 
as property secured alike by their own State laws and the supreme laws of the land. 
Belligerent rights were adopted with caution, lest the independence of the rebels should 
thereby be conceded. Everywhere extreme prudence was observed, and everywhere 
defunct laws of defunct States were attempted to be galvanized into life. Even in this 
hall for a long time during the last Congress, we exhibited the farce of calling South 
Carolina and her sister conspirators for bills and- resolutions. In July 1862, the Presi¬ 
dent with his habitual caution and prudence—and in consonance, it is believed, with a 
very extensive public sentiment—in a solemn document in relation to the Confiscation 
Act, laid before both Houses of Congress, declared that it was “startling to say that 
Congress can free a slave within a State and yet on the first day of January follow¬ 
ing, he issued a Proclamation, that will render his name as famous and imperishable 
as that of Washington, in which he declared freedom to nearly all the slaves in the 
seceded districts. 

But I repeat, we have made progress. We have, after much delay, determined to 
confiscate the property of rebels. We no longer drive back the fugitive from oppres¬ 
sion to miserable bondage. We no longer force him against his will to prosecute acts 
of treason and rebellion, but we invite him to partake of the blessings of freedom ; we 
give him a musket and rank him amongst the defenders of the country. We have 
determined to prosecute the war in accordance with the laws of nations, disregarding the 
pretended constitutional claims of rebels in arms. 

Still, sir, there is some difference of ^opinion in the country in regard to the proper 
mode of treating those States, and in respect to the power of Congress over them. 
Even in this Hall we occasionally hear a feeble echo of non-coercion sentiments ; but 
the voice of the people is for war and complete subjugation. 

Perhaps, amongst the friends of the administration, there is not entire unanimity on 


5 


all points of minor consideration; but I believe tbey generally agree that the Grovern- 
ment has authority to superintend, regulate, and control the manner of the restoration 
of the seceded States to the Union, and to impose such conditions as the public safety 
may require. I regard the difference of opinion on this side of the House as one rather 
of terms than of ideas, of theory, rather than practice. 

Whether—as it seems to me—the State is out of existence, or, as is alleged by the 
gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. Davis,] the State survives; but the Government is 
abrogated, and the Constitution is “absolutely dead,” ('which I think is substantially 
the same proposition,J “and incapable of revival except by a revolutionary process 
or, as is affirmed by the gentleman from Pensylvania, [Mr. Stevens,] the seceded 
States are foreign powers, is not, perhaps, material to the present discussion. The im¬ 
portant inquiry is not what technical words will most aptly define the anomalous con¬ 
dition of the seceded districts ; but the pertinent, practical questions are; What can 
we do with them ? How far can the National Government exercise jurisdiction within 
its own territorial limits ? To what extent may it intervene to protect its own loyal 
citizens in the midst of rebels ? What are its powers as an agent in the re-establish¬ 
ment of lawful State governments, and to what extent may it provide for security in 
the future ? 

Each of the theories to which I have referred asserts all the power necessary to war¬ 
rant the passage of the bill in question, as well as all the authority, that I have ever 
deemed requisite for a safe reconstruction of the Government. Nor do I perceive that 
the adoption of -either in exclusion of the others would produce any practical difference 
in results. If the State be abrogated, we may permit a new creation with such re¬ 
strictions as we may be pleased to direct. If the State survives, but her Constitution 
and government have been destroyed, we may allow a reorganization under such con¬ 
ditions and with such limitations as we see proper to impose. If the State has become 
a foreign power, then, as a conquered province, we may treat her as a part of the na¬ 
tional domain ; and in either case, we may provide for her people suitable government; 
and for such length of tirhe as she shall be unable to resume her place in the Union. 

Indeed we are solemnly bound by the organic law to “ guarantee to every State in 
this Union a Republican form of Government.”- But how? What i^ the construction 
of this provision, and what is the extent of the obligation ? It is clear that it does not 
bind the Union, in any case, to maintain a State Government. Such an obligation, 
for reasons that I shall state hereafter, would be as absurd as it would be impossible 
of performance. 

This clause in the Constitution, by misconstruction as it seems to me, has led th« 
minds of gentlemen into the strangest and wildest mystification. They argue, that as 
a necessary consequence of its existence, both in law and in fact, a State once orga¬ 
nized and admitted into the Union will ever remain a legitimate, organized State ; and 
therefore, assuming this as a postulate, it is alleged that a State cannot secede. The 
truth or falsity of this corollary depends upon what is understood by the term Seces¬ 
sion. The rebels who are entitled to the credit of introducing this word into our politi¬ 
cal language, claim that it is the right of a State at any time, at her election, to with¬ 
draw peaceably from the Union. This, in popular language, we call the doctrine of 
secession—a doctrine, I need hardly add, to which no loyal American will subscribe. 
Taking this as the true definition of secession, we say that no State can secede 
that is, legally withdraw from the Union without the consent of the other members. 
Whether there may be secession in fact, is a question of physical power. Should the 
rebels prevail and establish their independence, such a result would not vindicate the 
doctrine of secession ; but it would be the establishment of secession in fact. 'Would 


6 


it not, in that event, he ridiculous to affirm, that because, by the Constitution, there 
is to every State guaranteed a Republican form of Government, therefore those estab¬ 
lished independent States were still States of the Union ? 

For the same reason, it is said that no State can commit suicide ; but no sane, man 
believes that a policy of life assurance will secure immorality to the assured. So it 
may be said that no man can commit murder, because in all ages, it has been a crime 
against law, and the Constitution of the United States, expressly declares, that no man 
shall “be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” Yet Cain 
slew his brother, gibbets as punitive iustruments may be seen throughout the country, 
and within the last three years the rebels have murdered a quarter of a million of our 
fellow-citizens. 

Now it seems to me that the principles applicable to the questions of secession. State 
suicide, the abrogation of State Constitutions, and State Governments are simple and 
easily illustrated. No State can, without consent, legally withdraw from the Union, 
therefore there can be no legal secession. No State can release her territory and people 
from the claims and. injunctions of the Federal Constitution, until she shall have es¬ 
tablished her independence by force of arms ; so, in that sense, no State is out of the 
Union. When a State, bji the consent and active participation of her officers and people, 
has repudiated and forsworn the Federal authority, and joined an antagonistic confed- 
eracy, she is no longer a State in the Union ; but her territory and people, until she 
shall have established her enfranchisement, will remain within the jurisdiction of the 
United States, and amenable to the Federal authprity. If she succeeds, whatever may 
b® the guarantees of the organic law, her whole territory is out of the Union. By the 
action of tho people and tl. e State authorities, in making war upon the United States, 
and forming a foreign alliance, tne State—or the Government if you like the term 
better—is out of existence. Certainly you do not recognize the rebel authorities, and 
there is no other in those States; soiit follows that there is no Government in the 
seceded districts, that can be recognized under the Federal Constitution. As here 
used, I regard the terms. State and Government as synonymous, because I cannot con¬ 
ceive of a State, in the sense used as applicable to our political system, without some 
kind of Governmental organization. 

Now, I repeat that the Constitution does not guarantee, that every State shall main¬ 
tain a State Government. It does not agree that every State shall be properly offi¬ 
cered ; that she shall be represented in Congress, and retain her Constitution, her 
laws and her organization. It does not agree that the machinery of Government shall 
be kept in operation. There is no power in the general Government, to elect a Gover¬ 
nor of a State. Neither the President nor Congress, nor both combined can elect a 
Federal Senator, or Representative—a member of a State Legislature, or even a town 
constable. There is no power to prevent a State from amending, changing, or abolish¬ 
ing her Constituiton, and should she abrogate it by a vote of her people, there is no 
power in the general Government, to make another for her. State Governments, State 
Constitution, and State elections, spring from the will of the people. If the people will 
not have them, they cannot exist. You may guarantee and protect the people against 
monarchy; but you cannot be assured, and therefore you cannot undertake, that they 
will keep in operation, those functions of Government, without which there can be no 
State. 

What then, is the true construction of this clause of the Constitution ? The mean¬ 
ing seems to me obvious. The Federal Government has pledged its faith that no State 
of the Union shall be forced, or even permitted to have a monarchial Government; 
and that it will render all needful aid to enable the people to sustain one republican in 


7 


*■ 

form, but if they will not have it, you cannot exercise the functions of State Govern¬ 
ment for them. Such is the present condition of the rebellious districts. They had 
State Governments under the Constitution, and within the Union, but they tore them 
into pieces, and cast away the fragments. They would not have them; they would 
not be protected. But amid the traitors, surrounded by the ruins of those fallen Gov¬ 
ernments, are true patriots and loyal men. They are citizens of our common country, 
and entitled to all the benefits guaranteed by the Federal Constitution. They had not 
votes and arms sufficient to resist the traitors. You have strength to crush out rebel-' 
lion ; but you cannot vote, nor elect officers for them. But you can give them tem¬ 
porary Government, republican in form—such as is now enjoyed by hundreds of 
thousands of American citizens without the limits of State organizations; and adopt 
prompt and efficient measures, for an early restoration to their former rights and privi¬ 
leges. Such I understand is the purpose of the bill. 

I shall not now enquire whether this bill is, in all respects, the best that can be de=- 
vised. On questions so grave and so new, it is not to be expected that different minds 
will arrive at precisely the same conclusions, especially in matters of detail. But it^ 
appears to me that it provides substantially for the exigencies of the case. It asserts 
very distinctly that the governments of the seceded States have been' overthrown. It 
declares the right, where local laws have become extinct, to substitute Fedwal authority. 
It provides for the appointment of a provisional “ governor, who shalTbe charged with 
the civil administration of such State until a State government therein shall be recog¬ 
nized.” It provides “ so soon as the military resistance to the United States shall have 
been suppressed in any such State, and the people thereof shall have sulhdently re^' 
turned to their obedience to the Constitution and laws of the United States and one^- 
tenth of the white male citizens shall have taken an oath to |npport the Constitution 
©f the United States—for the calling of a ” convention charged to declare the will of 
the people of the State relative to the re-establishment of a State government.” Ifc 
excludes from the electors of delegates, as also from the delegates to such convention 
every “person who has held or exercised any office, civil or military. State or Confed¬ 
erate, under the rebel usurpation, or who has voluntarily borne arms against the United 
States.” It provides “ that all persons held to involuntary servitude or labor in the 
State” shall be “ emancipated and discharged therefrom. It provides also that there 
shall be incorporated into the Constitution of the State the following provisions : 

“ First. No person who has held or exercised any office, civil or military, State or Con¬ 
federate, under the usurping power shall vote for or be a member of the Legislature or 
Governor.” 

‘ ‘ Second. Involuntary servitude is forever prohibited, and the freedom of all persons 
is guaranteed in said State.” 

From the very commencement of civil war, to statesmen, as well as to the masses of 
the people, the question of reconstruction has been a source of great embarrassment. 
Whilst, in some quarters, theories and plans were suggestedT'at an early day, in others, 
it was insisted that the question should be postponed until after the suppression of the 
rebellion, and the restoration of order. It is difficult, however, to understand how the 
latter proposition can be carried into effect—how seven millions of people can be re-, 
duced to order, without some kind of civil government. But for some months past we 
have been admonished by the course of events, that delay cannot with safety be much 
longer tolerated. In Arkansas, Louisiana, and Tennessee, the loyal men are demand¬ 
ing protection and deliverance from anarchy, misrule, and tyranny. Their voice has- 
been heard at the Executive Mansion, and responded to in a Proclamation accompanying 
the last annual message. This is the first distinct act of any branch of the G overnment 


8 


looking to a solution of the difficultT'. 'Without stopping, sir, to enquire to what|ex- 
-tent this power is conferred upon the Executive Department, I hail the Proclamation 
fwith gladness as a step in the right direction. It is a beacon light, hy which we may 
''he led out of the labyrinth in which we have been groping. The President has per¬ 
formed his part; it remains to us to do ours. What he has thus happily initiated we 
must fashion and complete. He could do no more. He is the Commander-in-Chief of 
tk^^rmy and Navy. He can declare martial law, and repress rebellion, but he has no 
^wer to institute civil government. He may impose conditio es, grant pardons and pro- 
i claim an amnesty, but he bannot admit new States. This bill or something akin to it, 

<comes in requisition as a handmaid to the proclamation, in order to render it safe and 
^efficient. Nor is there any conflict or incongruity between the two. The proclamation 
^asserts that ‘‘the loyal State governments of several States have for a long time been 
subrbrted.” It assumes the right to require oaths and to prescribe terms as conditions 
precedent to the re-establishment of a State government that “shall be recognized as 
the true government of the State.” The bill goes somewhat fajrther, but the principle 
upon which the authority is assumed is the same in each. If you have power to in¬ 
tervene in the local affairs of the seceded districts, it is upon the assumption that the 
^tate or at least the local government is overthrown. Certainly you csuld not require 
test oaths, nor dictate as to the class of persons who should control the government of 
Michigan or any other loyal State. If you can impose one condition you may insist 
upon others. The Proclamation suggests it, “ as not improper, that in constructing a 
loyal State government in any State, the name of the State, the boundary, the subdi¬ 
visions, the constitution, and the general code of laws, as before the rebellion, be main¬ 
tained, subject only to the modifications, made necessary by the conditions” therein 
“stated and such others, if any, not contravening said conditions, and which may be 
deemed expedient by those framing the new State government.” 

Now it is manifest, that if the President has power to direct the organization of a 
“new State Government,” with “modifications,” he may direct and require just such 
and just so many modifications, not inconsistent with the Federal Constitution, as shall 
seem to him expedient. If he may require modifications that shall guarantee the lib- 
erty of freedmen, he may also insist upon such changes in the Constitution and laws 
;3i8 will abolish the institution of slavery and exclude traitors from the elective franchise, 
‘Conceding, then, the competency of the Proclamation, it is clear that the difference be¬ 
tween that instrument and the bill does not arise out of the question of Constitutional 
^mthwity, but that it consists in the extent to which the acknowledged power is pro¬ 
posed to be exercised. It is a difference in degree and not of principle 

Should there be any doubt of the correctness of my construction of the Proclamation, 
••an so far as it relates to the condition of the seceded States and the power of the Federal 
^Government, as an agent in reconstruction, it would be removed, I think, by referenc* 
to the proclamation of General Banks, issued at New Orleans, January 11,1864, in pur"* 
suance, as he says, ‘ ‘ of authority vested ’ ’ in him ‘ ‘ by the President of the United 
States,” inviting the loyal citizens to cast their votes for the election of State ofi5.cer3, 
This Proclamation declares that certain oflicers therein named “shall, when elected, 
■for the time being and until others are appointed by competent authority, constitute 
the civil Government of the State under the Constitution and laws of Louisiana, except 
30 much of the said Constitution andi^ws as recognize, regulate, or relate to slavery, 
■which, being incompatible with the present condition of. public affairs and plainly inap- 
•plicable to any class of persons now existing within its limits, must be suspended, and 
Ihey are therefore and hereby declared to be inoperative and void,” 

The Proclamation also asserts the authority to call a Convention for the revision of 


e Constitution, to declare the basis of representation, the number of the delegates, 
and the details of the election, in the following language: 

‘ ‘ IV. In order that the organic law of the State may be made to conform to the will 
of the people and harmonize with the spirit of the age, as well as to maintain and pre¬ 
serve the ancient landmarks of civil and religious liberty, an election of delegates to a 
Convention for the revision of the Constitution will be held on the first Monday of April, 
1864. The basis of representation, the number of delegates and the details af election, 
will be announced in subsequent orders.” 

It is hardly possible to assert a more complete and total abrogation of the Constitu¬ 
tion and laws of Louisiana, or to claim a more absolute and undivided authority and 
'♦‘control over the local affairs of that disorganized portion of our country. 

I have said that I approve of the President’s Proclamation as a step in the right di¬ 
rection. I do not complain that it goes no further ; but with profound respect, I submit 
that the aid of Congressional action may be found convenient, perhaps absolutely ne-^ 
cessary, to render it entirely adequate to a' safe reconstruction of the Government. 

“ New States,” says the Constitution, “may be admitted by the Congress into this 
Union.” Now, if the restoration of Florida would not be the admission of a new State, 
it would, at least, in the language of the President’s Proclamation, be the recognition 
of a “ new State Government.” It would be giving an influence and participation in 
the administration of the Governmental affairs of this country, to a State Government that 
now has no existence. It is certainly analagous to the admission of a new State, and 
I need hardly amplify the argument to show that it is a proper subject for the deliber¬ 
ation of Congress. 

I will now, for a moment, call your attention to the Proclamation, with the view to 
consider, whether, independent of the suggestions just made, the object to be attained 
would not be facilitated and more certainly secured by concurrent aid from legislation. 

That document grants “ a full pardon ” to certain persons “upon the conddtioji that 
every such person shall take and subscribe an oath and thenceforward keep and main¬ 
tain said oath inviolate,” and directs that said “ oath be registered for permanent pre¬ 
servation.” I read from the Proclamation: 

“ I,-, do solemnly swear, in presence of Almighty God, that I will hence¬ 

forth faithfully support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and 
the union of the States thereunder ; and that I will, in like manner, abide by and faith¬ 
fully support all acts of Congress passed during the existing rebellion with reference 
to slaves, so long ahd so far as not repealed, modified, or held void by Congress, or by 
decision of the Supreme Court; and that I will in like manner, abide by and faithfully sup¬ 
port all Proclamations of the President made during the existing rebellion having 
reference to slaves, so long and so far as not modified or declared void by decision of 
the Supreme Court. So help me God.” 

It also contains a proposition for the re-establishment of State Governments which I 
will also read: 

“,And I do further proclaim, declare, and make known, that whenever, in any of the 
States of Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, 
Florida, South Carolina, and North Carolina, a number of persons, not less than one- 
tenth in number of the votes cast in such State at the Presidential election of the year 
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty, each having taken the oath afore¬ 
said and not having since violated it, and being a qualified voter by the election law of 
the State existing immediately before the so-called act of secession, and excluding all 
others, shall re-establish a State Government which shall be republican, and in nowise 
contravening said oath, such shall be recognized as the true Government of the State, 




10 


and the State shall receive thereunder the benefits of the Constitutional provision which 
declares that, ‘The United States shall guaranty to every State in this Union a repub¬ 
lican form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion ; and, on 
application of the legislature, or the executive, ("when the legislature cannot be con¬ 
vened,} against domestic violence.’ ” 

There is also another sentence in'the Proclamation, to which it may be proper to 
call your attention : 

“And it is suggested as not improper, that, in constructing a loyal State Goveniment 
in any State, the name of the State, the boundary, the subdivisions, the Constitution, 
and the general code of laws, as before the rebellion, be maintained, subject only^td 
the modifications made necessary by the conditions hereinbefore stated, and such 
others, if any, not contraveing said copditions, and which may be deemed expedient by 
those framing the new State Government.” 

Now it will not escape observation, that the Proclamation does not require, nor sug¬ 
gest any modifications of the Constitution, and code of laws existing before the rebel¬ 
lion, declaring the qualification ot voters ; nor does it require or suggest, the adoption 
of any Constitutional provision abolishing slavery. On the contrary, “ it is suggested 
as not improper, that in constructing a loyal State Government, in any State,” ‘‘"the 
Constitution and the general code of laws as before the rebellion be maintained, subject 
only to the modifications made necessary by the conditions, ’ ’ therein before stated, 
“and such others if any, not contravening said conditions, and which may be deemed 
expedient by those framing the new State Government.” 

What are those conditions, if any, which by the terms of the Proclamation require 
modification of the Constitution and general code of laws ? There is a condition de¬ 
manding an oath. It is also made a condition, that the State Government shall be re¬ 
established, by a number of persons having taken the oath, not less than one-tenth in 
number of the votes cast in the Presidential election of 1860. I do not observe that any 
other conditions are mentioned. It does not make it a condition precedent, that tho 
Constitution and laws shall be changed in regard to the qualification of voters. Now I 
understand that the elective franchise is entirely under the control of State regulation, 
and that it is generally provided for in the organic law. When therefore, the “ new 
State Government,” has been re-established in Mississippi, by one-tenth of the voters,, 
retaining “ the Constitution and general code of laws as before the rebellion,” what 
shall hinder Jefferson Davis from exercising in that State, the elective franchise ? Is 
there any thing in the Constitution and laws of Mississippi, that will disqualify an un¬ 
convicted rebel from voting ? Where will you find authority to prevent the traitors, the 
other nine-tenths of the voters from overpowering the one-tenth at the polls, and. 
taking possession of the Government of the State ? 

Care is taken to secure the protection of the freedmen, to the extent of the ability of 
the one-tenth against the nine-tenths ; but I do not discover that any modification is 
enjoined, that will have the effect to abolish slavery in the State. ' Conceding the- 
legality and sufficiency of the Executive Proclamations, for liberating the slave, I fail 
to perceive that any one of them has vacated the Constitution, or laws under which 
the institution of slavery is protected and sustained. The people of the newly organ¬ 
ized Governments may be true to their oaths, and sustain in good faith all the Procla¬ 
mations of the President; and yet in those re-established States, as in times .gone by, 
you may again hear the cry of the wretched slave, writhing in agony' under the task 
master’s lasli, and again you may witness with pity and shame, the sale of men and 
women upon the loathsome auction block. The oath does not eschew the traffic in 
human beings. The recipient of the amnesty, does not forswear the slav« trade. 


11 


When Arkansas shall have been restored, though all of her late slaves shall have been 
emancipated, commerce will be left free and unrestrained; and what legal principle 
shall prevent her people from buying and holding in bondage all the slaves in Ken¬ 
tucky and Tennessee ? 

The bill proposes to interpose guards against the possible occurrence of the calami¬ 
ties to which I have referred; and it also makes special provisions for initiating and 
regulating the preliminary proceedings for reconstruction, which are not very definitely^ 
pointed out by the terms of the Proclamation. It may be said that all incipient pro¬ 
ceedings may be instituted and directed by military officers, and that all needful rulea 
and regulations may be provided from time to time, by military orders adapted to the 
circumstances of each particular case. It may be so. I have never shared in the fright¬ 
ful forebodings of approaching military despotism, by which some gentlemen seem to be 
so seriously disturbed. I have the utmost confidence in the ability and purity of intention 
of the present Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, but we have no right to cast 
upon him those duties, which the Constitution and the people have clearly imposed upon 
us ; and it cannot be denied, that according to the spirit of our political institutions,, 
the organization of civil government belongs rather to the civil than to the military' 
departments. Besides it seems to me not wholly free from danger to confide matters oP 
so great concern, entirely to the hands of any Executive. Though we may be quite 
satisfied with the present policy, we have no assurance of its continued duration. Not¬ 
withstanding the Constitution provides that no person shall be deprived of life without 
due process of law, we have seen that there is a power above the Constitution; and: 
death or rotation in office might produce the most disastrous results. Another Execu¬ 
tive might adopt a different policy ; another Commander-in-Chief might issue Procla¬ 
mations and military orders of an entirely opposite character ; and an enlightened 
people need not be told that the destinies of a great nation should not be made depend¬ 
ent upon the life or continuance in public service of a single individual. 

I do not make these suggestions in the spirit of unfriendly criticism. Whilst there? 
may be grave doubt of the power of the President to establish or inaugurate “new 
State Governments,” I am rejoiced to know that the Chief Magistrate of the nation 
asserts the sovereignty of the Federal Government, and its paramount authority over 
every part of its territory. The absurd doctrine of the immortality of State Govern¬ 
ments is denied; and the right to impose terms and conditions precedent to the recog¬ 
nition of new organizations, is distinctly asserted. 

‘ ‘ A mode in and by which the. national authority and loyal State Governments may¬ 
be re-established, ” has been “suggested”—a mode, which in my judgment, if seconded: 
by the passage of this or some similar bill, will be found ample, safe, and effective.- 
Then^the system will be uniform by which the prodigal States from time to time can 
present themselves with the certainty of recognition by all branches of the Govern¬ 
ment ; and the country will feel confidence in their return as the result of entire re¬ 
generation, and as giving promise of permanent restoration. 

But to avoid misapprehension, I desire to say, that I would not refuse to recognize a 
reorganized State, simply because she had not been reconstructed under the provisions 
of this bill and the President’s Proclamation. According to the practice of this Gov.- 
oriiment, almost uniform. States have been admitted from the Territories in pursuance- 
of enabling acts of Congress ; but in exceptional cases, some have been received with- ^ 
out preliminary legislation. Should North Carolina to-day present herself with a Con¬ 
stitution providing for the purity of elections, and inhibiting slavery ; and with evidence 
of sufficient popular favor to give assurance of permanency I would not hesitate to 
recognize her Government, simply because it had not been initiated and perfected under 


12 


the Proclamation and the proposed legislation. It is said that Arkansas will soon ap¬ 
pear at the doors of Congress under circumstances similar to those I have suggested. 
Let her come. I would welcome her with joy and with kindly greeting. I would re¬ 
joice to see her stripped of the vile rags, rank with secession and treason with which 
she has been clothed, and the hands of her people cleansed from the blood of patriotic, 
martyrs. 

But the passage of this bill would exclude no such State from the Union. Congress 
would still be at liberty to exercise its judgment, and free to use a wise discretion, in 
any special case that might arise. But the possibility that some State, or that all the 
States in rebellion may, at some future time take voluntary action, and emerge from 
anarchy \^ithout encouragement and aid from Federal authority, cannot justify us in 
the negfect of the plain duty to adopt measures for an early and methodical reorgani¬ 
zation. We may not adopt the improvident policy of Micawber, and wait for some¬ 
thing to turn up. It is due to those true patriots and loyal men, who have endured 
sufferings, indescriable, in their devotion to their country, that the policy of all branches 
of the Grovernment be distinctly defined and proclaimed ; that the conditions precedent 
to acknowledged restoration be so clearly and unambiguously defined and declared, 
that when they present themselves they may demand recognition as a right. All oc¬ 
casions for conflict between the several departments of the Grovernment should be re¬ 
moved. The time of the House should not be occupied in the examination and acri¬ 
monious discussion of the claims of gentlemen to seats on this floor as the representa¬ 
tives of constituencies in districts where it is not known that there is any State Gov¬ 
ernment. And it is equally due to the people of the loyal States who have sent bro" 
thers, sons, and husbands to the battle-field—whence they will not all return—that 
sample provisions be made to prevent a recurrence of treason and civil war. This bill 
would provide guards and checks, and it would guarantee against surprise from rebels 
and the resuscitation of slavery; but it would not retard—on the contrary it would 
accelerate the restoration of permanent peace and Union. As a people without gov¬ 
ernment or organization are in a state of anarchy, their efforts to establish law and 
order must be more or less impeded by caprice, by divided counsels, and by the want 
of form, regulations, and method. The passage of this bill is the establishment of in_ 
oipient civil government, and provides, at once, rules, regulations, and system with the 
proper officials to carry them into execution. Too much care cannot be observed in all 
our movements to prevent treachery and c<^nsequent miscarriage. The oaths of men 
whose hands are dripping with innocent blood should be received with great caution. 
We have already, on too many occasions, had experience of the sad consequences of 
attempting to rely on Punic faith. The rebels have a two-fold inducement to take the 
oath of allegiance—first, to avoid punishment and save their estates ; and second, to 
get control of the new Government as- a means of crushing out the loyal men, and ad¬ 
vancing their treacherous, nefarious schemes. The advice of the imitative Sambo to 
Lis companion, to administer the oath to the rattlesnake and let him run, is sufficiently 
suggestive. The oath of a traitor, thrice perjured, may well be regarded with sus¬ 
picion. 

Mr. Speaker, my exhortations to wariness in the establishment of new State Gov¬ 
ernment may seem indicative of over caution. I confess to great anxiety on this sub¬ 
ject. When I refle6t upon the ruin that has been brought upon the country ; when I 
know that the nation has been well nigh ^depopulated; when I think of the bleeding 
hearts, the widows and orphans in every part of the land; when I consider that uni¬ 
versal liberty has been endangered; when I can see, in imagination, in this and in 
future generations, the increased toil and privations that will become necessary in order 


9 


13 

to discharge the immense national debt accumulated in consequence of this causeless 
rebellion, I am not willing that thoughtlessness, want of foresight, timidity, or a false 
sentiment of tenderness, shall prevent the adoption of means, however stringent in 
their character, that may, by posibility, be necessary to prevent those governments 
from relapsing into the hands of traitors. Such, I believe, are the sentiments of the 
loyal people everywhere manifested. It is their wish and determination that the end 
of this war shall forever close the door against treason and rebellion. They desire to 
make the settlement a finality. They insist upon complete, absolute, and unqualified 
submission to the Constitution of the United States, without mental reservation and 
beyond any contingency. Nor do they believe such a consummation attainable without 
the utter annihilation of the slave-power. They will not be satisfied to rest upon 
probabilities ; they will take nothing upon trust. They have no confidence in men who 
have been, of their own free will, actively engaged in rebellion, and they will expect, 
that in the reconstruction of State Government, positive provisions will be made for 
disfranchising the leading rebels. 

Mr. Speaker, I desire now to recur, for a moment, to a provision of the bill to which 
I have already briefly alluded—I refer to that clause which it is proposed ta insert in 
the Constitution of the State, in which it is declared that “involuntary servitude is 
forever prohibited and the freedom of all persons is guaranteed in said State.” 

During thcs time that I have occupied a seat in this Hall I have purposely refrained 
from entering upon the discussion of slavery. I have not pursued this course with a 
vie.w to the concealment of my opinions. My views as to the peculiar institution are 
familiar to my constituents ; and the yeas and nays so often recorded in the .Journal of 
the House, during*the last three years, would indicate that they are not wholly un • 
known in this Hall. But, whilst I am opposed to slavery in every form, and have 
voted on all occasions in accordance with * my convictions, I have not felt the necessitT’ 
of vindicating my opinions in set speeches. 

The question of slavery is not new. It has been a subject of discussion ever since 
my earliest recollection ; and I have been informed that it was occasionally mentioned, 
in history before I was born. A speech at this day upon the origin, character and evils 
of slavery would not properly be called a “thrice told tale.” Numerically it would 
be more accurate to say that it is a repetition for the millioneth time. The poet has 
recounted its wrongs and cruelties in mournful strains. The historian has warned you 
that it saps the foundation of nations. The divine has shown you that it is a crime 
against the claims cf universal brotherhood and the Christian religion. The political 
economist has proved that it impedes the growth of national wealth. The ethnologist 
complains that it obliterates the distinctive characteristics of the races; and an emi¬ 
nent individual, disdaining analysis, has comprehensively declared that it is the “sum. 
of all villanies.” Indeed, for years the question of slavery has been conspicuous at 
the hustings, in the halls of Congress, in the pulpit, in the lecture room, in the public 
journals, in the literature of the country—in the literature of tbe civilized world. The 
man who at this day can originate one new idea, or the statistician who can marshal 
one new fact in relation to slavery, should have a patent for^ his invention, and be 
ranked as one of the greatest discoverers of any age, I shall not, therefore, depart from 
the rule by which I have thus far been governed, and allow myself, on this occasion^ 
to be betrayed into the character of a rehearser. Nor shall I malce an argument to 
prove, what by the rebels, is not denied, that slavery is the sole cause of the present 
rebellion. Taking this fact as admitted, and satisfied, as I am, that such a system of 
bondage is wholly incompatible with the permanent existence of republican institutions, 


I 


14 


I regard tlie adoption of tlie freedom clause af the bill into the constitutions of the rebel 
States, as absolutely essential to a safe reconstruction of the Union. 

This ubiquitous ahd ever-absorbing question of American bondage has at length be- 
oome the great problem of the war. It was not so considered at the commencement of 
hostilities. Whilst we all understand the nature of the malady, we all, nevertheless, 
determined to remove the disease without disturbing the exciting cause. But it could 
not be done. Providence and the rebels had otherwise determined, and I accept with 
€heerful submission the joint decree. Every vestige of slavery in the entire country 
must be removed; and to that end we must watch with the keenest vigilance every 
step that is taken to reconstruct the rebel States. Let the great cotton and sugar¬ 
growing regions be made forever free. Adopt speedy and efficient measures to procure 
an amendment to the Federal Constitution that will banish the evil from all the loyal 
States ; hope for its speedy extinction everywhere ; but ever remember, that so long 
as a slave breathes within our borders there is no safety for republican institutions. 

I am not unmindful, Mr. Speaker, of the announcement, so often repeated, that ' 
* ‘ slavery is dead. ’ ’ , The early friends of emancipation, whose lives and fortunes have 
been devoted to the cause of humanity, seeing, at length, a prospect of the realization 
of the hope of their lives, already too long deferred, with credulity pardonable but too 
prompt and easy, catch up and re-echo the declaration that slaevery is dead ! The dem¬ 
agogue, from personal considerations, and as a plea to excuse himself from an honest 
discharge of palpable duty, exclaims, with enthusiasm, that slavery is dead! The an¬ 
cient alies and present sympathisers with Southern aristocrats, in order to moderate the 
activity of earnest men, quietly concede that slavery is dead. Even the gentleman 
from New York, ("Mr. Brooks,^ a few days since produced some sensation, and drew 
forth the protest of his friend from Indiana, ('Mr. Voorhees,^ by declaring that he ac¬ 
cepted the abolition of slavery as a fact accomplished. But let no man be deceived— 
slavery ‘‘is not dead, but sleepeth.” 

In 1787 it was said io be smitten with mortal disease; but it “is ever dying, 
yet never dead!” The wisest of our early statesmen, with prophetic vision, foresaw 
our present calamities, and- with promptness and fidelity sounded the alarm ; but 
their warning voices died away unheeded. How small an effort at that time would have 
rooted out the 'evil and saved us the ruin that is now upon us. And what a lesson of 
nstruction is here afforded to show the errors of the past, and to direct our steps in 
the future ! Then no man attempted to justify slavery on Christian principles. It 
was admitted to be a social, moral and political evil; but it was said that it carried 
within its own system the seeds of dissolution, and would gradually and quietly dis¬ 
appear. Philanthropists and patriots were quieted, whilst the magnitude of the evil 
was steadily increased. Again, at a later day, thoughtful men were aroused to action by 
^he astonishing increase of slavery, and the rapid expansion of aristocratic power ; and 
public journals were established to awaken and enlighten the public mind ; but again the 
people were quieted by the appliances of party machinery ; by the invention of schemes 
of colonization, and by repeated assurances of the efficacy of natural causes and the 
humanitarian spirit of the age, in due time, to dispel all apprehensions of danger. 
Still this waning institution continued to expand until new and wider fields were de¬ 
manded for its subsistence and occupation—when at length, its champions, feeling se¬ 
cure in their position, threw off all disguise, advanced the doctrine that slavery is the 
normal condition of the colored race, and caused grave divines to proclaim its divinity 
from the sacred desk. That institution which was dying in 1787, but which has con¬ 
tinued to breath painfully up to the present time, has ruled this country with an iron 
hand for sixty years, has brought on a war that has cost us a half million of lives, and 



15 


\ 
f 

now holds in hondage millions of human beings. But in the x>lenitude of its power, 
its devotees became too confident and daring. Not content with the quiet, unmolested 
control of all departments of the Government, they sought and demanded a recogni¬ 
tion of its absolute supremacy. They would not be confined within State limits, nor 
bounded by parallels of latitude. They would make the Declaration of Independence 
a lie, and the Great Republic a house of bondage. 

They cast the Constitution under their feet and invoked the protection of the sword. 
Throwing aside every legal claim and pretension, they risked all upon the fortunes of 
war. In their insane arrogance and greed for' power, they inflicted an injury upon 
their cause beyond anything that all the Abolitionists of a century had been able to 
effect, and it cannot be denied that at length, slavery has been severely wounded in the 
house of its friends. The legal barriers by which it was surrounded have been broken 
down; and it now lies bleeding and prostrate at our feet. It is at- our mercy. Shall 
we save or shall we destroy ? Shall we imitate our fathers, and after all our bitter ex¬ 
perience, wait with patience to se'e its flickering life quietly ebb away, and thus run the 
hazard of resuscitation and complete convalescense—or shall we like prudent and wise 
men dispatch the monster and bury it out of our sight ? Do we desire to put an end 
to human bondage ? Then let us declare our inclinations^ Do we intend such a result ? 
Then let us act accordingly. For myself I think the path of duty lies before plain and 
distinct. I have no doubt as to what my course should be. By no consent of mine shall 
a single one of the wayward States ever be permitted to participate in shaping the des¬ 
tinies of this nation until she has by her organic law forever prohibited involuntary 
servitude, except as a punishment for crime, within all her borders ; nor whilst I have 
life and strength, will I cease to urge by all Constitutional means, the reedom of every 

r habitant of the United States without regard to color or race. 



y-f-. 

{'• 




-r 


% 




V.:l ■!:> f?f UrU. I 

■!' ■o'rif .hb'fy fffii jtjr,/ ' 

• ‘i.';-o;;ri.?^ "' . jJ-^-:.::-,w: .^:. .L;.;sv ■■,) ■ 

rca . :/u''' ■ -r ; 

. ■; ' '"'i’ 

't;::-v;- 


0>.;f.fa ■^..■■il lr§/' 

t 






■[kf-i:^^''}i!r‘!>/'::.ii>iffiX ■■, ., 

f^; ““ '1 .;.;■ v-n i ^ 

•■ V I r k i< ' . . f r • •> , , t , ■ . ' . ’■ '■ 

■-' -rr ' ^ ^ -; 

■n: ;■ n : 'sj-,,y?Vr: .i d?:>. ■: r -.! ■^ 

•'■■’■'.* ■ ‘y - j-’a-;-' ■ ■-.' • , 

i'ji a;:,j : I'!. ;'A 

b.lJa^fUui'U^fm^ro:.. ..xx[ ’ ■ X b, O b. rX. ^ 

VV.i.M -u{] -na ^ , f.j..;_ ,y ^ 

i;jrj;ufrc.7£uvot* ■ vi>3''i.'»j.Y/4^ 

'{ty’xjr 


fi’/mi 

, ■« ■ >-■ it'te’’ ^ 











* I \< 












y 


.o‘ 




f Tp-;- 

^ '-W>. V' ' • -/ V/'f ‘** 'y'’V*’■* i'f ■ ’ ' 

■r, ■', V;p,, ):., - ■; - *>.-,C.ff y 'y^ 'i fk 

fe’’ .'-I?- .i‘■ ’e.-f; t - :A: J'r^' '‘V-.-■■iRfstVifea 


VV.''■/ '■■'■.• ■'• ' '' ■ ;t' 'Si "■ ■ . 

« ' ''.V'U-,V'- . 

■ 1'^.'^v'' ■^• " ■ , - '•“ *3 

E^. ; ■ . :,.. .' • jaC 

. ' . ■' .!t{ ; ' t *»’ ■» . ' 



mi 




'•>! V ..V' •y '.,, , .v^ 


■, V'/?'; i . 

■ ’ I ' w • 

/ 


:/ » 


r •. 


''' '^ ■ 

' “BBgrl ' ■'■' " ' v;,:i 


. A r ^ 

' • .V. 




• . * ‘ 



MCi • ’ -O * • ' 

■,v 


:i%' <' 

*• , 

I ■ 


S,:; 


.V 


.». 



: 


h: 



' ' ' V/- 

‘ ’ k 

; ,V‘. ,' 

r . 



4 1 . 

•’ .* H 

■.. ? n • 

* ^ IM< * 



■ ^ ii'' \* kT .j * • . 

.. / ' .,r ■? '■-..^V-VV 

'* f •*' ^1 ^ /J* y ' ■'■'7 

. . « ^ . r*J *_ >. ‘ J ' 




• /ff 


' ’'‘’ - '■^■*' ' '; 

\r>' '-«v-i'’.. 



'V '3'' ^ 

' ,V w • • 


A 


♦ • 

V . . i' 


I !»' / 


> >• •;• . 




t •> 


'j* 'ly" .^'' 


f . « 


4 4 


a 


A. 


I 




r' k 



1 


t ? 



’ V 


I 



/ 


« 






t 


I 


A 




V 

* 



>»• 



•^1' 



I 


* 


^ ** 


ft 


« 





( 





I 


. # 






f 




- w 


\ 



n 





f 

• t 







f 


I 




J 


i 




I 





• I 

1 



t 





] 



/J 



i 








. 

< ■• I 











1 





Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2010 


PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 













































